Loudoun County Board of Supervisors Business Meeting – February 18, 2026
Loudoun County Board of Supervisors Business Meeting – February 18, 2026
The Loudoun County Board of Supervisors held its regular business meeting on February 18, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. (with public input starting as early as 6:00 p.m.). Chair Randall called the meeting to order, followed by the pledge of allegiance and an invocation by Supervisor Kershner. The board deferred two items: Item 8 (Cochran Tech) was deferred to April 21, 2026, and Item 9 (Sterling Boulevard Service Road Improvement) was deferred to a future meeting. The board then adopted the consent agenda and considered several standing committee reports, legislative updates, and public input.
Consent Calendar
- The consent agenda was approved unanimously. It included:
- R‑1: Resolution to Recognize Asbury Lloyd, Jr. (approval and presentation)
- R‑2: Resolution to Recognize Recipients of the 2026 Award for Best Workplace for Commuters (approval only)
- 1a: Award Authority Increase for traffic calming and safety improvements
- 1b: Contract Award for IT hardware, software, and maintenance support
- 1c: Contract Award and CIP Amendment for Route 7/Route 690 (Hillsboro Road) Interchange
- 1d: Human Resources Policy Handbook revisions (Chapters 1 and 9)
- 1e: Family Services Advisory Board 2025 Annual Report and Bylaws Revision
- 1f: Revised Community Criminal Justice Board Bylaws
- 1g: Loudoun County Community Services Board Bylaws Revision
- 1i: Attainable Housing Loan Program – Clear Springs Apartments (Phase 1 and 2)
- 1j: Attainable Housing Loan Program – Dogwood Farm Station Apartments
- 1k: Attainable Housing Loan Program – Dulles Plaza Apartments
- 2a: Heritage Commission 2025 Annual Report
- 2b: Heritage Commission Bylaws Amendment 2025
- 2c: Historic District Review Committee 2025 Annual Report
- 2d: Historic District Review Committee Bylaws Amendment 2025
- 2e: Project Plan for CPAM‑2025‑0002 (2026 Review of the Countywide Transportation Plan)
- 3a: Appointments and Confirmations
- 4: Administrative Items Report of February 18, 2026
- 5: Ratification of Tentative Agreement with IAFF Local 3756 for voluntary early detection cancer screenings
Supervisor Briskman highlighted the attainable housing loan programs, noting that the three items (Clear Springs, Dogwood Farm Station, Dulles Plaza) would provide a total of 378 attainable units with affordability restrictions ranging from 40 to 75 years. Chair Randall and Supervisor Turner praised the county’s housing efforts.
Item 7 (Auto World Substation) was pulled from the consent agenda for a separate vote.
Public Comments
- Shane Crow (Algonkian district, speaking for Upvote Virginia) reported that two ranked‑choice voting bills (HB 630 and SB 176) had passed their respective chambers and would expand local options for using ranked‑choice voting to all local governing bodies, including school boards and town councils. He expressed support for the legislation.
- Mr. Griffin was called out of order by the chair for addressing the audience instead of the board. After a warning, he was ruled out of order and did not complete his remarks.
- Mr. Heidi (Sterling) raised concerns about the school budget, noting that per‑student spending was projected to reach $25,000 with a declining enrollment, and that the budget was increasing more than 6 % per year. He questioned the addition of 14 elementary school principals and the discrepancy between teacher contract raises (6.5 % over three years) and the proposed 2.5 % step increase. He urged the board to scrutinize the budget.
Discussion Items
- Legislative Update (Item I‑1): Jonathan Freeman reported on the status of bills after crossover. Key points:
- Housing grants bills passed both chambers and are expected to move quickly.
- Oak Hill acquisition bills: HB 500 passed the House unanimously, but Senator Perry’s bill was left in Senate Finance; the matter is now a budget conversation.
- Local anti‑rent‑gouging authority bills were defeated (House bill continued to 2027, Senate bill defeated).
- Data center bills: Undergrounding transmission line bills (carried by Perry and Srinivasan) passed the Senate; they allow localities to assess costs to the GS5 rate class (high‑energy users ≥25 MW). The SCC clarified that the locality’s share could be 0–100 %.
- A bill allowing a 15.8 % tax by Dominion on GS5 rate class to aid low‑income elderly/disabled electric costs passed the Senate.
- A bill to take 30 % of new data center revenue was defeated.
- All transit funding bills were defeated; now a budget discussion.
- Chair Randall noted that the Faith in Housing Act (HB 630/SB 176) is still active and likely to go to conference.
- Board members discussed the implications of the undergrounding bills. Supervisor Briskman expressed concern that the bills place the burden on localities to fund undergrounding, even if Dominion or the SCC do not agree. Supervisor Umstattd worried that the costs would fall on residents and businesses rather than solely on data centers. Supervisor Turner noted that the GS5 rate class could be charged, and that the bills provide a local option. Supervisor Crony asked about the authority to consider grid impacts; the county attorney clarified that the board does not currently have that authority. Supervisor Turner also highlighted SB 253, which would assign costs of new capacity and distribution infrastructure to the high‑usage customer class; he argued it directly addresses the issue.
- Auto World Substation (Item 7): Chair Randall made a motion to approve the substation (ZMAP‑2024‑0010, SPEX‑2024‑0047, SPEX‑2025‑0112). Supervisor Crony noted the substation would be approximately 30 feet from the W&OD trail and expressed concern about the trail becoming a utility corridor. Supervisor Briskman added that the area already has data centers and that a 12‑foot screen would not mitigate noise and visual impacts. Staff confirmed the 12‑foot wall and that the buffer would be 15 feet wide. The motion passed 5‑3‑1 (Chair Randall, Supervisors Crony and Briskman voted no; Supervisor Sainz absent).
- Ashburn Village Boulevard Pedestrian Safety (Item 10): Supervisor Glass moved to endorse the relocation of the crosswalk, installation of rectangular rapid‑flashing beacons, construction of a raised median refuge island, installation of ADA‑compliant curb ramps, and a budget adjustment of $532,000 from the CIP contingency. Chair Randall split the motion. The first part (endorsing the crosswalk relocation, flashing beacons, and perpetual maintenance) passed 8‑1 (Chair Randall opposed). The second part (raised median, ADA ramps, and funding) passed 8‑1 (Chair Randall opposed). Chair Randall argued that the location had no pedestrian crashes in five years, that an underground tunnel and a nearby traffic signal exist, and that the $532,000 could be better spent elsewhere.
- CPAM‑2024‑0005, Electrical Infrastructure (Item 6): Staff presented proposed map and policy amendments to the 2019 General Plan regarding siting, design, and aesthetics of high‑voltage transmission lines. Supervisor Turner offered an amendment to Strategy 6.1E to add reference to “appropriate locations identified in the fiscal management and public infrastructure policies in Chapter 6,” which staff supported. The amendment passed 9‑0. The main motion (approving the CPAM with the amendment and other proposed edits) also passed 9‑0.
- Appointments (Item 3b): Supervisor Glass nominated Jessica Lewis to the Library Board of Trustees for the Little River election district. The nomination was accepted.
Key Outcomes
- Consent Agenda: Approved unanimously.
- Auto World Substation: Approved (5‑3‑1).
- Ashburn Village Boulevard Pedestrian Safety: First part (flashing beacons and maintenance) approved (8‑1); second part (raised median, ADA ramps, funding) approved (8‑1).
- CPAM Electrical Infrastructure: Approved with amendment (9‑0).
- Cochran Tech (Item 8): Deferred to April 21, 2026.
- Sterling Boulevard Service Road Improvement (Item 9): Deferred to a future meeting.
- Legislative Motions: The board passed three motions supporting specific bills:
- Spark Program (House Budget Amendment 307H and Senate Budget Amendment 308): Unanimous (9‑0).
- SB 339 (State Corporation Commission cost allocation proceedings): Unanimous (9‑0).
- SB 253 (assigning costs of new capacity and distribution infrastructure to high‑usage customers): Unanimous (9‑0).
- Closed Session: The board voted 9‑0 to enter closed session under Va. Code § 2.2‑3711(A)(7) to consult with legal counsel on actual or probable litigation. Upon returning, the board certified that no formal action was taken in closed session.
Voice for a Cause: The chair recognized Station Stitchers, a nonprofit that has handcrafted and donated over 5,000 quilts to local organizations serving people in need. President Henrich noted that the group is entirely volunteer‑run and relies on donations and grants.
Meeting Transcript
Thank you. Got it. Well, good evening, supervisors, supervisors, good evening, staff, and good evening, Loudon. I like to call the February 18th, 2016, Loudoun County Board of Supervisors Business Meeting to Order. This room has a hearing loop. If you need a hearing assistance, please switch your hearing aid to the telecall mode call mode. If you need a headset, we have those available as well. Um this evening, Mr. Kirshner is gonna lead us in a prayer, our words of information and the pledge of allegiance. Thank you, Madam Chair. Let's pray. Um God, we just thank you for the opportunity to serve this county. And we we uh do appreciate our positions, but we also know that we answer to the folks, and I pray that you will help us to make wise decisions in each and every meeting that we have, both tonight and going forward for the remainder of our terms. We thank you for our constituents. We pray for protection over them, and we um we pray that uh our although debate sometimes can be intense, we pray it will be a congenial, and that we will be uh we will be advocates for uh what we believe is right, and we pray this in your name. Amen. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under Godisable with liberty and justice for all okay. I got we've got all kind of stuff going on up here because all kind of stuff is happening in the past hour or so. So let me start with this. Um we have we are deferring item nine, the response to the board member initiative, Sterling Boulevard Service Road Improvement. It has been deferred to a future board meeting. Um the staff will talk to Mr. Saints and decide what meeting they want to bring back that back to. Um item number eight, Leggy 2024-0037, Cochrane Tech Z Map 2024-0012, special exception 2025-00 uh 25, special exception 2025-0029, special exception 2025 dash zero zero three four, special exception twenty twenty-five dash zero zero five four and special exception twenty twenty-five dash zero one one one has been deferred to a future business meeting for action. I will say it is my habit to if I get a request from the um applicant to defer an item, I would do that one time almost automatically. This is the second request from Conqueror Mill to defer that, and so when it's a second request, I do we ask for and require a little more reason of why they want to defer it. And so I have talked to them today, and they actually said that it's not for boat counting. They are literally working on the item um and trying to uh do some things that have been requested uh by some of my colleagues, and so as they are going to continue to work on the item, and because they are working on the item, I would do this, I will give it one more deferral, but this will be the last one for Cochrane Tech. Now I would read the proposed consent agenda, and it is as follows. Madam Chair, before we we start the consent account uh uh agenda, you indicated to a future meeting. Do you is there a date we could put in? Um it doesn't, I haven't talked to them, and I and so I need to talk to them before because I don't want them to have to defer it a third time. So let me I haven't they haven't they did not give me an idea of when that would be. I do not believe it will be it will be sometime in March. I just don't know which meeting in March it would be. Can I can I suggest we re we do it till March 17th, the second meeting in March? And if it's done at that time, we wouldn't have to go back and redo all the notices. It could be it is earlier than that, though. It could be the first meeting in March. So I that's why I'm saying I don't I don't know which meeting in March it will be. But if I say the 17th, that they may want to go to the first meeting. My thought is the public is charged with following the meeting, and if we say to a future board meeting, we will need to notify the public of when this is going. Oh, I understand what you're saying. Um my suggestion would be the 17th. Yeah, I don't uh let me do this. Let me um let me leave it like this right now. We take a break, I'll call them. And they can tell me which meeting in March they might want to go to and then I will announce that. Okay. Because I if they want to go earlier, I want I want them to go earlier.
openpublica.com